Hahnemann’s Assistants



(Both volumes are in the possession of Dr. Richard Haehl, of Stuttgart.)

Cothen, June, 30th, 1834.

After considering the matter with Mr. Jahr, I find that it is impossible to arrange a repertory differently from that which you and Jahr have compiled, and you can be perfectly satisfied. Only a dictionary would give the seeker more complete information, and we can well leave this work to Mr. Jahr, whom, if God grants me a further lease of life, I shall sometime be able to put in the position to do it; he has a great aptitude for it, and will make himself far more useful to our science, I think, than if he went to Paris, Brussels, or America.

Cothen, Aug. 21st, 1834,

If God permits, Jahr will work out the symptoms dictionary, and I shall contribute what I can. He is gifted for it, and has unswerving diligence. I think that it will have to be printed as one large octavo dictionary, with nonpareil or pearl type like Cramer’s dictionary printed by Vieweg. It will be an immense but valuable work.

JAHR’S REPERTORY.

Dr. Roth of Paris, who translated Jahr’s repertory into French, criticised, in a letter to Hahnemann of August 23rd, 1834, ” the deficiencies of the work, which is desultory and vague”

Many things have been printed with interlined letters which are not proved; they are pure fiction or originate from mixtures and preparations, and not from simple medicines.

There are numerous anatomical errors. errors of expression. terms which savour of the very worst allopathy, bad and false diagnosis, such as nervous pains in the eye. The terms are not consecutive, and there are many useless repetitions and provincialisms. Homoeopathy, which was given to us by the genius of Hahnemann, belongs to the world. I beg of you, Hofrath, in the name of your great truth, do not associate with your great work a certain hasty production of books which will only cause harm.

Many objections could be raised against the idea of Mr. v. Boenninghausen to produce a dictionary of symptoms. I am alarmed when I hear that they have begun to make mixtures of homoeopathic remedies. Goodbye truth!

Hahnemann to Boenninghausen: Cothen, Dec. 26th, 1834.

I tried to make a better and more useful man of Jahr during the eight months he was here; may God give his blessing.

The Princess Friedrich was left without a physician-in- ordinary as she had dismissed Dr. Aegidi because he would not listen sympathetically to her complaints, and I suggested Jahr to her, and he is now with her. She wanted to pay off Dr. Aegidi with a few thalers — because he had not made an arrangement that there should be a notice of three or six months on either side. But I ventured to make such strong representations to her against it, that I was afraid of incurring her complete displeasure. However she listened and consulted a lawyer, who advised that she should give him six months stipend, and 20 Ldr. for travelling expenses as far as Dusseldorf, which she did. I could not do more for him. According to his last letter he seems to have expected much more from me.

(For more details about Jahr, see account of his life in Chapter 27.)

SUPPLEMENT 125.

HAHNEMANN AGAINST THE SLACK HOMOEOPATHS.

In a letter to Dr. Stapf, of March 13th, 1826, after a remark on the “Anti-Organon,” he wrote:

I dread much more the empirical contamination of that society of pseudo-homoeopaths about which you write, and which they had sufficient prudence not to invite me to join. I have been pretty correctly informed by aural communications of their doings. I fear that inaccuracy and rashness will preside over their deliberations, and I would earnestly beg of you to do all you can to check and restrain them. Should our science once lose the dignity which it derives from its utmost conscientiousness and accuracy, and this is certain to happen if the dei ninorum gentium ( the lower Gods, that is inferior people – R.H) desire to make themselves prominent with their so-called observations, then I should grow fainthearted for our science, lest it should not rise from the dust, and we lose the certainty which is all we need. I therefore, pray of you to eliminate from your Archiv all superficial observations of pretended successful treatment. Admit only truth; only accurate and careful observations of the most accredited homoeopathy; they must be models of good homoeopathic art. In spite of all precautions, some of these recorded cures of chronic diseases will incur the suspicion that may not be permanent, when the eyes of the medical world are opened on the subject of the cure of chronic diseases, by my book, which after ten years labour is not ready, but is gradually approaching completion. (This refers to the book which appeared in 1828: “Chronic Diseases, Their Specific Nature and Homoeopathic Treatment” – R.H)

Hahnemann wrote to Regierungsrath von Gersdorff: This and the following of Hahnemann to Mr. von Gersdorff have been published by Dr. Goullon, of Weimar, in the “Zeitschrift des Berl. Vereins hom. Arzte, 1897, Vol. 16, pages 382 to 413.

Kothen, August 26th, 1825.

I do not know anything about the homoeopathic Society; presumably they dare not write to me about it, or invite me. I should tell them what I think very plainly, especially if things are as you say. And what is the use of societies, what good can they do at the best of times? They cannot gain any political influence through them, and advancement or perfecting of science cannot be achieved through them. The Archiv exists mainly for the purpose of having an opportunity to reply to the many invectives. Science has not grown more perfect through it. I, who am only one, did most for our art. The conception of the true science has been spoiled lately by the many arrogant heads who will interfere, especially as every one thinks he knows better than the Master.

I cannot reform all these confused thinkers; I must let them write and talk, otherwise I should have to spend the remainder of my short span of life doing that which is meant for something better. The wise will keep to my words. Even the invectives which shower down upon us in profusion can do no harm. What harm did the infamous antagonistic writings against cowpox vaccination achieve? None at all. They have more probably contributed to the investigation and recognition of its excellent value. Therefore let us remain calm. In time they will keep all the more closely to my words of experience.

Kothen,

May, 12th, 1828,

The homoeopaths of Leipsic do not agree with each other; they do not work together for the good cause, which is of less consideration to them than their own egoistic aim; they are lacking in the real virtue which finds its happiness in the welfare of all.

See also the letter to Dr. Aegidi of September 16th, 1832, in Chapter 27 of the first volume.

SUPPLEMENT 126.

TITLE-TATTLE.

How mistrust was aroused in Hahnemann during his seclusion at Kothen, in consequence of idle gossip, is shown in the following letter which he wrote to Baron von Gersdorff: Kothen, Jan. 12th, 1829.

It has been a hard struggle for me to do this, and accede to his (Hartlaub) repeated offer of recording Lycopodium, without letting him notice anything of the information I have received about him. (This man– Hartlaub — is supposed to have accepted this proposition of mine of his own accord, yet in spite of the willingness he shows in offering to do it for me as proposita mercede, he is said to be secretly publishing such a record.) I acted as if I were not aware of it, and as if I considered his willingness to undertake Lycop. to be sincere and not a sham. He accompanied this letter, so full of assurances of esteem, by the considerable present of his recently published homoeopathic tables in map form (which has been published by Leo of Leipsic) together with the practical communications of the recent months. However probable the supposed information concerning his own report seemed to me, yet I could not accept it as a fact from those words of his. Now only await the first opportunity to make careful investigation, but in a private way from Arnold of Dresden, where he is supposed to be printing his record. This opportunity has not yet presented itself, and I cannot make an apparent excuse. But it will soon arise. Before I know for certain — for frequently slander is spread — I will not attack him. But we must not hurry with the work, even if that secret information were false (please, therefore, keep this perhaps unfounded insinuation to yourself) because the members are indolent and often have not such time.

SUPPLEMENT 127

HAHNEMANN’S WARNINGS.

To Stapf: 24th, March, 1828

I believe that in Leipsic the homoeopathic forces are not united, and ruin each other by intrigues — and so bad passions destroy what the sublime art should unite in order that it may do good. “From the heart springs the good seed,” Haller,

20th February, 1829.

I see with regret that you and Rummel are much annoyed about the conduct of Trinks and Hartlaub. For God’s sake do not either of you betray such annoyance. I see quite clearly that this conduct is egotistic, arrogant, interfering, ungrateful, and insidious, and might injure us. But we ought not and must not be hurt, as ungratefulness recoils upon the guilty. We must consider ourselves above such a sense of injury. We must only consider actions which are to our disadvantage; they must no hurt as if we are to be sensible. Both of you learn this from me. However despicable and abominable this behaviour appears to my intelligence, yet I do not get annoyed about it, because that would do me harm, and no matter how much I was annoyed it would not put matters right. It is a trial from Providence, from the All-Wise and All-Good Ruler, who carries all things to a right ending, if we draw useful teaching from it and let it guide our future actions.

Richard Haehl
Richard M Haehl 1873 - 1932 MD, a German orthodox physician from Stuttgart and Kirchheim who converted to homeopathy, travelled to America to study homeopathy at the Hahnemann College of Philadelphia, to become the biographer of Samuel Hahnemann, and the Secretary of the German Homeopathic Society, the Hahnemannia.

Richard Haehl was also an editor and publisher of the homeopathic journal Allgemcine, and other homeopathic publications.

Haehl was responsible for saving many of the valuable artifacts of Samuel Hahnemann and retrieving the 6th edition of the Organon and publishing it in 1921.
Richard Haehl was the author of - Life and Work of Samuel Hahnemann